WashPo on Hayworth-Mitchell race

The Washington Post has a new article out discussing the race for House Representative in AZ-5, between JD Hayworth (R) and Harry Mitchell (D):

The Republican is an immigration hawk who favors cracking down on illegal immigrants and wrote a book called "Whatever It Takes." The Democrat calls himself an immigration realist who would combine tighter border controls with a path toward legal status.

...Republican-dominated 5th District is considered competitive for the first time in a decade. Analysts point to troubles in the White House and Congress, as well as Hayworth's outsize [N.B., that is, out of the mainstream] profile on immigration. It all makes for an intriguing contest in an unpredictable state where pollsters see a shift to the center.

The article's overall structure appears to take a bit of a bias in favor of Hayworth. Early in, for example, it says that Hayworth has 12 years of experience in Congress while Mitchell has none, except for a statue in his honor. It isn't until midway through the second page that we start to learn part of the reason why Mitchell has a statue in his honor, and even then some key points are clearly left out.

Such as the fact that Mitchell earned his bachelor's degree in political science from ASU in 1962 and a master's degree in public administration from ASU in 1980. Or the fact that he served on the Tempe City Council for 8 years. Or that he was the highly successful and much beloved Mayor of Tempe for 14 years. Mitchell's Wikipedia entry refers to this service thusly:

Mitchell's work as Mayor is often credited with revitalizing downtown Tempe, and building partnerships between small businesses, communities, corporations, investors, and Arizona State University to manage sustainable economic development and urban growth.

Nor does the article note that Mitchell served in the AZ State Senate for 7 years, either. It does reference Mitchell's teaching American Government and Free Enterprise at Tempe High School for 28 years, at least. But other than that, and the passing reference to Mitchell's having "helped approve 31 balanced budgets in Tempe and the state Senate", one would get the impression from the article that JD Hayworth has more experience in government, which is palpably not the case.

Of course, Hayworth WAS a linebacker and a sportscaster prior to election to office in the Republican sweep of 1994. So he has plenty of experience throwing his weight around and talking a lot.

The article does note two of the key factors in the race: immigration and corruption.

On the issue of corruption, the article notes that Hayworth is tainted by his association with Abramoff:

Hayworth used sports skyboxes that Abramoff billed to clients, but he failed to report their use to the Federal Election Commission until the criminal investigation of Abramoff, since convicted, became public.

We can expect JD and his campaign to run as fast as they can from that issue and try to bloviate and divert attention elsewhere. The Abramoff-Hayworth connection is not something JD wants people to be discussing.

On the immigration issue, Hayworth is one of the more extremist rightwingers, advocating pretty much an enforcement-only approach. Mitchell, on the other hand,

backs the middle ground favored by Bush, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano (D). He describes their approach with words such as "sensible" and "realistic."

I appreciate the way some key politicians at various levels have set aside their partisan differences to develop a collaborative, constructive solution. It's really a sign of the best kind of politics. But Hayworth hasn't been part of the solution, here, he's been part of the problem. I've been very disappointed at how Hayworth has been polarizing this issue, far out of the mainstream of Arizonan thinking and pandering to the most angry, impractical and radical fringe of the Republican party. So I think it'd be great to have a little bit more of Mitchell's "sensible" and "realistic" approach in our representation, on this issue and others.

As for that, the article sums up Mitchell's approach to governance quite nicely:

Mitchell...is admired as an approachable and effective leader in the city, which is home to Arizona State University. The impressionistic statue shows him as a man tall enough to see the city's future -- a visionary.

So, Mitchell: "an approachable, effective leader", "sensible and realistic" and "a visionary".

Sounds pretty good to me.

[Update:: Western Democrat has this good overview of hot issues in the upcoming election and attitudes among Arizonans. Following on what I was referring to above, regarding Hayworth's being out of the mainstream on this issue, WD has this to say:

Seven out of ten Arizonans favor immigration law reform that permits foreign workers to enter the U.S. without breaking U.S. law. Three quarters believe that it is a federal rather than a state responsibility to secure the borders. Only 4% of voters believe than illegal Mexican immigrants include terrorists. Two thirds disagree with the assertion that illegal immigrants who come to the U.S. seeking work on no better than common criminals. Arizonans are equally split on whether it is immoral to deport illegal workers when doing so would split up a family.

In short, while Arizonans are concerned about immigration, most are not panicked and aren’t buying into extreme rhetoric. Most are clearly open to a humane middle-ground on immigration reform.

[Update II: Good news for us Mitchell supporters! AZ Congress Watch reports that Mitchell is still collecting signatures but "The word is that Harry has enough signatures but wants as many extras as possible just in case. His people left around noon, though, so it sounds like he’s ready to file." Go Harry!!]